Are the Democrats failing or doing well as an opposition?

[Person Man]

On one hand it is too soon to tell because the first mid term hasn't happened yet. On one had they are succeeding because Trump's legislative agenda has been substantially weakened and grassroots protesters are getting better at optics, but on yet another they are failing because Republicans have been court packing and Democrats haven't been able to show meaningful improvements in off-elections.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Failing. They cant generate a common message and just keep spamming bs nothing stories rather than push the 10 million and 1 storiesTrump should be criticized for.

[Yank2133]

They are doing just fine given the situation. Most of the major achievements of the Democratic-controlled congress from 2009-2010 is still intact. And they are also crushing the GOP in terms of fundraising money and have opened a huge lead on the them in terms of the congressional ballot.

[Nyvin]

If nothing else the Democratic Party of today is about 20x better than what we had from 2001-2006.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

I think they are doing very well. They're preventing Trump from passing anything legislatively, despite the fact he has both the Senate and the House, and they are being very aggressive with him, something they failed to do with President Bush.

In terms of the 2018 midterms, they are smashing it. They are recruiting strong candidates from all different fields and groups like doctors, engineers, teachers, scientists, young people, African Americans, members of the LGBT community, etc. They are leading the congressional ballot by an average of 9.2 points according to the RCP, they are a lot more popular than the GOP, and they are out-fundraising the Republicans.

[pbrower2a]

Democrats aren't congealing behind one agenda (other than "Resist Trump"), one vision, or one leader. But they are  ahead of where they were in 2005 as the 43rd Presidency started to unravel, let alone in 2001 at a comparable time. 

But they did not have a clear vision of a future, a well-defined agenda, or an obvious leader in October 2005, either.

[Sumner 1868]

If nothing else the Democratic Party of today is about 20x better than what we had from 2001-2006.

Not really. The difference is instead of being too soft on him like they were with Bush they've embraced endless Fox-style sensationalism.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Failing, obviously. They're hoping that no matter how bad they suck, they can still beat Trump, but that didn't work out for them last year.

[Mr. Smith]

Relatively well.  Much faster performance than the GOP at this point 8 years ago, much better than where they were in 2005 at this point.

Honestly you'd have to go back to before '94 to find the last time they were even close to this good.

It's frustrating, but still understandable...2018, that's a different story.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Shockingly good in some areas but they still lag with no clear message or idea for 2018 (but in fairness usually that is something that really develop until the summer of 2018), they got to get younger, and finally they have got to f**k off with the hostile toward Bernie's wing (looking at you Perez)

[ProgressiveCanadian]

The party that lost to Bush and Trump? A bunch of failures.

[Yank2133]

If nothing else the Democratic Party of today is about 20x better than what we had from 2001-2006.

Agreed.

People who bitch about the Democratic party today, forget how bad things were during the Bush years.  12 Democrats voted for President Bush's tax cuts. Today, the GOP would be lucky to get Manchin to vote for Trump's tax cuts.

The 2001-2003 era Democrats would have caved on the ACA as well. Things aren't perfect with the party, but things are much better today then it was 14-16 years ago.

[Tekken_Guy]

They're doing great. Harnessing anger at a historically unpopular president to their advantage. They're primed for big election wins soon.

[YE]

They did well with healthcare, but need to be as aggressive as Bernie in opposition to these unreasonable tax cuts.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am reminded of a time magazine article from 2006 that used arrows to rate the situation for two Parties. The Republican arrow was pointing downward and the Democratic arrow was pointed sideways.


Opposition parties never have a coherent message or anything like that in the mid terms, or a clear leader. That is not the point and no one cares. What matters is 1) You are not the party in power, 2) Does the candidate fit well with the district and 3) What five, six, ten things are you going to do those first 100 days, if you get the majority.

This is how Pelosi got to be Speaker, on the backs of 50 Pro-life Democrats (20 of whom were new, 30 were already there), many of whom even signed off on Heath Shuler's SAVE Act which was an enforcement-only immigration bill. Of course Dems are going for a more suburban swing district strategy as opposed to a rural blue dog one.

But they were united in opposition to Bush's handling of Iraq (ranging from competence in the rebuilding to outright opposition to the war), raising the minimum wage, draining the swamp of the 109th Congresses corruption and fixing the "Donut hole" in Medicare Part D.

Ironically, there was a lot of commentary about the Republicans not being able to "cash in on the economy" at all during the midterms. Of course in hindsight that is obvious why, but at the time GDP growth was strong, unemployment was 4.6% and wages were finally starting to rise. Housing sales were starting to collapse on backs of 4% interest rates, but there was no comprehension of its impact on the larger economy and the credit crunch didn't start until the following summer. But a lot of the seats lost were in places where the economy was to seen to have "never recovered" including in OH and the rust belt, upstate NY and other places, where economic conditions were bad. Of course there were losses elsewhere where this wasn't a factor, it is hard to completely rule it out as playing some role in some races.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Opposition parties never have a coherent message or anything like that in the mid terms, or a clear leader.

Not true, see Newt Gingrich in 1994.

[KingSweden]

I’d give a 7/10. I’m optimistic... but was burned badly last year. I’m worried that we’re continuing to be outflanked on cultural issues, especially immigration.

[Yank2133]

Opposition parties never have a coherent message or anything like that in the mid terms, or a clear leader.

Not true, see Newt Gingrich in 1994.

Which is the only time that has happened in recent history.

[AtorBoltox]

They’re doing exceptionally well. They’re unified in opposition, have ensured the GOP have passed no major legislation and are on track to win big in 2018.

[TDAS04]

Improving, but recent good news for Democrats tends to result from Republicans acting stupid rather than Democrats acting smart. 

[°Leprechaun]

Improving, but recent good news for Democrats tends to result from Republicans acting stupid rather than Democrats acting smart. 

Yes, and of course Moore is helping with this.

[Middle-aged Europe]

They're in bad shape, but not nearly as bad as the one the Republicans are in.

[TheSaint250]

No. The only reason they look like a strong opposition is because Trump and the current GOP congressional leadership are incompetent.

[Virginiá]

No. The only reason they look like a strong opposition is because Trump and the current GOP congressional leadership are incompetent.

I'd have to agree, at least in part. Republicans are a mess, and it's stalling out their agenda bigly. And as for opposition on the left, that's just the thing. Activist energy is helping to fuel the opposition, which is separate from Congressional Democrats. The party itself is still making bumbling mistakes, such as that thing about Ellison supporters.

But this doesn't mean I think Democrats won't still do well next year. I think Republicans were probably destined to make huge gains in 2010 too, simply due to Democratic missteps in power and a slow economic recovery. Same thing seems to be happening now. An incompetent Congressional GOP and Trump intent on burning his party at the stake is helping to fuel a large backlash against the Republican Party.

In the end, I could see Democrats making substantial gains next year and at that point you'll probably see a shift in opinion of how the party is doing. It's easy to dump on them year after year when they keep losing. Not so easy if they actually start winning.

[Don Vito Corleone]

They could be doing better, but I'm pretty satisfied with them.